Column: Illinois budget debate raises key
questions on taxing retirement income
Send a link to a friend
[February 28, 2019]
By Mark Miller
CHICAGO (Reuters) - Greetings from
Illinois, a state that never tops the rankings of places to retire. We
have one of the great American cities, but also polar vortexes and an
enormous state budget deficit - and now there is renewed talk about
taxing retirement income to help close the gap.
Illinois is one of the few states that have an income tax but do not tax
any retirement income. Two leading business groups recently renewed
their calls to change that as part of broader, desperately needed fiscal
reforms. The ensuing debate casts a spotlight on an important national
conversation about how states should tax retirement income, if at all.
The federal government taxes income from tax-deferred retirement
accounts, but Social Security benefits for lower-income retirees are
exempt. And taxpayers over age 65 also can take an extra deduction of
$1,300 (joint filers) or $1,600 (single filers).
But the policies of various states are all over the map. Data provided
by the Institute on Taxation and Economic Policy shows that 11 states
tax some portion of Social Security benefits, usually mirroring the
federal formula. Many others tax pensions and tax-deferred accounts,
although some have exemptions that protect lower-income, public sector
workers and military personnel.
Aside from Illinois, just two other states that levy income taxes exempt
all retirement income: Mississippi and Pennsylvania.
PRESSING ISSUE
The policy of exempting retirement income dates to a time when elderly
poverty rates were much higher than they are today. As recently as 1970,
almost 25 percent of Americans older than 65 lived in poverty, according
to the Census Bureau; now it is around 9 percent. The federal government
did not tax Social Security until the 1980s.
Protecting vulnerable low- and moderate-income retirees remains an
important goal, but blanket exemptions make no sense from a tax policy
standpoint. “Almost any economist will tell you that we should treat all
income equally,” said Don Boyd, co-director of the State and Local
Government Finance Project at Rockefeller College at the University at
Albany, State University of New York. “If you have $50,000 of income, it
doesn’t matter if it is from a pension, dividends or wages - tax law
generally doesn’t make too many distinctions.”
Taxing retirement income will be a more pressing issue as the country
ages, Boyd notes. “The composition of income will change nationally as
we age - there will be less wage income and more from retirement
savings.” And retirement income is growing much more quickly than wages.
Analysis by Boyd of Internal Revenue Service data found that aggregate
retirement income rose 50.3 percent from 2009 to 2016, compared with
25.9 percent growth in wage income.
That means the cost of funding government will fall increasingly on a
smaller share of households in states that forego taxation of retirement
income. And it means that some affluent households enjoy an exemption on
retirement income. According to the Civic Committee of the Commercial
Club of Chicago, 51 percent of excluded retirement income in 2016 was
associated with taxpayers with adjusted gross income of $100,000 or
more.
[to top of second column]
|
THE COST IN ILLINOIS
In Illinois, the retirement exemption is the most expensive tax
break in the state, costing $2.3 billion in fiscal 2015, according
to the state Comptroller.
And Illinois is on the financial ropes. The state ran budget
deficits in seven of the last 11 years, and will do so again this
year, according to the Civic Federation, a government watchdog
group. Illinois ran up a huge mountain of unpaid bills that peaked
at $16.7 billion in November 2017 and stands now at $8 billion.
Then there is the Illinois pension mess. The state had five defined
benefit pension systems with unfunded liabilities totaling $133.7
billion at the end of fiscal 2018, the Civic Federation reports. The
funds’ combined funded ratio stood at 40.1 percent.
The Civic Federation renewed its call this month for the state to
apply the same taxation of retirement income used by the federal
government. The Civic Committee of the Commercial Club, which
represents the corporate community in the region, reiterated a
similar recommendation. It called for taxing retirement income but
exempting the first $15,000 in income.
Illinois taxes income at a flat 4.95 percent rate, and there is a
growing movement to amend the state constitution to permit graduated
rates. That is the preferred approach of the state’s new Democratic
governor, J.B. Pritzker, who opposes taxing retirement income. Other
opponents of taxing retirement income argue that the graduated tax
should come first, along with higher taxes on businesses. “Let’s put
it all on the table, and be fair to everyone,” said Bob Gallo, state
director for AARP.
Another argument against taxing seniors is that they will flee to
lower-tax states. Anecdotal evidence aside, research on this topic
analyzing actual moving patterns shows that the elderly are less
likely to move than younger people, and that very few move solely
because of tax burdens, Boyd said.
“Older people tend to be more settled in the communities where they
live - that doesn’t mean someone with the wherewithal to go anywhere
in the country won’t do that, but taxes don’t affect mobility all
that much.”
Polar vortexes are another matter entirely.
(The opinions expressed here are those of the author, a columnist
for Reuters.)
(Reporting and writing by Mark Miller in Chicago; Editing by Matthew
Lewis)
[© 2019 Thomson Reuters. All rights
reserved.]
Copyright 2019 Reuters. All rights reserved. This material may not be published,
broadcast, rewritten or redistributed.
Thompson Reuters is solely responsible for this content. |